#3 Ongoing BoM utter incompetence – month after month

Another month – another miserable failure for the BoM rain “Outlook” as real world data shows the continent awash with rain. Small wins in SW WA and far eastern Australia are hugely outweighed by comprehensive failures over vast areas elsewhere.
October quarter BoM rain prediction failure
The Parliament of Australia, House Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Innovation, is holding an Inquiry into long-term meteorological forecasting in Australia. Great to see some MP’s are trying to call the giant BoM to account. Tough job – the BoM needs to be told to stop wasting resources kowtowing to IPCC science and concentrate on real-world issues affecting Australia.

10 thoughts on “#3 Ongoing BoM utter incompetence – month after month”

  1. Warwick thank you for those links
    now here’s one for you www.informaworld.com/smpp/section?content=a928051726&fulltext=713240928
    quoting from the conclusion
    It is claimed that GCMs provide credible quantitative estimates of future climate change, particularly at continental scales and above. Examining the local performance of the models at 55 points, we found that local projections do not correlate well with observed measurements. Furthermore, we found that the correlation at a large spatial scale, i.e. the contiguous USA, is worse than at the local scale.

    Do we have something better than GCMs when it comes to establishing policies for the future? Our answer is yes: we have stochastic approaches, and what is needed is a paradigm shift. We need to recognize the fact that the uncertainty is intrinsic, and shift our attention from reducing the uncertainty towards quantifying the uncertainty (see also Koutsoyiannis et al., 2009a). Obviously, in such a paradigm shift, stochastic descriptions of hydroclimatic processes should incorporate what is known about the driving physical mechanisms of the processes.

    what on earth does ‘stochastic’ mean?

  2. The Committee ref to by RichardC(NZ) above has spoken
    Recommendation 1
    The Committee recommends that CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology provide to the Australian Government a report with detailed explanatory information as to why a particular dynamic forecasting model or system was chosen for use in Australia. The report should be completed by the end of 2010.
    Recommendation 2
    The Committee recommends that weather and climate variables and influences, for example, particulates, be identified, thoroughly examined to assess their degree of impact on our weather and climate, and incorporated into forecasting models as necessary. Priority areas for incorporating these variables should be published.

    There are 8 recs in total
    Interesting to see that David Jensen (he of calling for Royal Commission into the science of AGW) was among the members of the committee

  3. www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/open-threads/climate/climate-science/energy-and-fuel/
    please leave a message

    Condolences for the Pike River victims

    Send your condolences to the families of the victims of the Pike River coal mine disaster.

    To leave a message for their loved ones please use the comment field at the foot of this page.

    24/11/2010 – Stuff

    The Pike River coal mine victims: Conrad John Adams, Malcolm Campbell, Glen Peter Cruse, Allan John Dixon, Zen Wodin Drew, Christopher Peter Duggan, Joseph Ray Dunbar, John Leonard Hale, Daniel Thomas Herk, David Mark Hoggart, Richard Bennett Holling, Andrew David Hurren, Jacobus (Koos) Albertus Jonker, William John Joynson, Riki Steve Keane, Terry David Kitchin, Samuel Peter Mackie, Francis Skiddy Marden, Michael Nolan Hanmer Monk, Stuart Gilbert Mudge, Kane Barry Nieper, Peter O’Neill, Milton John Osborne, Brendan John Palmer, Benjamin David Rockhouse, Peter James Rodger, Blair David Sims, Joshua Adam Ufer, Keith Thomas Valli.

  4. Thanks Val for reminding us. Does anybody know of a reliable fund where donations for families can be left ? The NZ Herald has this info – Would be nice if Australians could donate without bank fees scraping off a significant percentage. I should have added – from my recent experience – bank fees on BOTH sides of the ditch !!

  5. Warwick I’ve asked Richard Treadgold for an IBAN and an account name; I’ll let you and your readers know the details

  6. I know Australians are generous and the following appeal is for the families of the Pike River Miners who have been lost
    A lonely death, an inexpressible grief
    the details of the appeal are here:
    Richard Treadgold says:
    November 26, 2010 at 3:50 pm
    The BNZ have given me a little more detail. They have waived transaction fees, so everything you send will reach the miners’ relief fund.

    For New Zealand residents, the bank account to credit — through internet banking or at your nearest BNZ branch — is:

    Pike River Mine BNZ Appeal
    Greymouth branch
    02 0844 0074501-00

    From overseas, the easiest donation method is with a credit card through Grab One at www.grabone.co.nz/dunedin-invercargill/pike-river-miners-relief-fund. If you go to the Australian site at www.grabone.com.au, there’s a link to the NZ site at the top of the page.

    You have to register first, which is easy and painless.

    PLEASE NOTE that there’s a limit of $5 per donation, but NO CREDIT CARD FEES are charged by Grab One, so to donate more, just perform multiple transactions.

    Large overseas donations
    For those of greater generosity wanting to donate three or four-figure amounts, you should use a Telegraphic Transfer from your local bank. As well as the basic account information shown above, you will need this:

    Bank address:
    Store 91,
    MacKay Street,
    Greymouth 7805.


    Your transaction will cost something at your end, plus there’s a fee of $25 added at this end.

    The latest news is that $1.3 million has poured in to the miners’ relief fund.

    Thank you for your generosity.

  7. You do realise that these are simple probabilities,not simulations with GCMs,don’t you? The background information notes at the bottom of each forecast are vital reading.

    The outlook is based on a few simple precedent factors. Past seasons with similar combinations of SSTs and ENSO conditions. They said that most of central Australia had a even chance of being wetter or drier than the median,according to those stats. It was wetter:success! The outlook did not estimate how wet or dry it would be,just the probabilities of exceeding or failing to make the median.

    The biggest failure was in a small area,western Victoria where confidence of drier conditions was stronger. This outlook was issued in late July;at the time the SOI was falling sharply. After the release,the SOI climbed rapidly and La Nina bloomed. That rapid shift changed the value of the outlook.

    This is a simple,low cost way of providing some direction. They are not complex climate models run forward. Just odds.You might ask why bother-and you do-but I don’t think it is some big effort to produce them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *